“To many, it came as a surprise that the RCMP is alleging that two terror suspects arrested in Canada on Monday were supported by al-Qaeda operatives in Iran.

The Sunni-based al-Qaeda and Shia Iran belong to different branches of Islam that have been at odds historically. But in recent years U.S. officials have formally alleged that Iran has allowed al-Qaeda members to operate out of its territory.”

Both at face value and upon deeper examination, this assertion is utterly absurd, divorced from reality, and indicative of the absolute contempt within which the Western establishment holds the global public. In reality, the West, the US, Saudi Arabia, and Israel in particular, have propped up and perpetuated Al Qaeda for the very purpose of either undermining or overthrowing the governments of Iran, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Algeria, Libya, Russia, Malaysia, Indonesia, and beyond.

To undermine Iran, which is predominantly Shiite, the Bush Administration has decided, in effect, to reconfigure its priorities in the Middle East. In Lebanon, the Administration has cooperated with Saudi Arabia’s government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations that are intended to weaken Hezbollah, the Shiite organization that is backed by Iran. The U.S. has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda.

The Administration may have been willing to rely on dissident organizations in Iran even when there was reason to believe that the groups had operated against American interests in the past. The use of Baluchi elements, for example, is problematic, Robert Baer, a former C.I.A. clandestine officer who worked for nearly two decades in South Asia and the Middle East, told me. “The Baluchis are Sunni fundamentalists who hate the regime in Tehran, but you can also describe them as Al Qaeda,” Baer told me. “These are guys who cut off the heads of nonbelievers—in this case, it’s Shiite Iranians. The irony is that we’re once again working with Sunni fundamentalists, just as we did in Afghanistan in the nineteen-eighties.” Ramzi Yousef, who was convicted for his role in the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who is considered one of the leading planners of the September 11th attacks, are Baluchi Sunni fundamentalists.

The report would continue by stating (emphasis added):

One of the most active and violent anti-regime groups in Iran today is the Jundallah, also known as the Iranian People’s Resistance Movement, which describes itself as a resistance force fighting for the rights of Sunnis in Iran. “This is a vicious Salafi organization whose followers attended the same madrassas as the Taliban and Pakistani extremists,” Nasr told me. “They are suspected of having links to Al Qaeda and they are also thought to be tied to the drug culture.” The Jundallah took responsibility for the bombing of a busload of Revolutionary Guard soldiers in February, 2007. At least eleven Guard members were killed. According to Baer and to press reports, the Jundallah is among the groups in Iran that are benefitting from U.S. support.

The manifestation of this insidious conspiracy can be seen playing out across Syria in which US-backed terrorists openly operating under the flag of Al Qaeda are locked in a catastrophic sectarian bloodbath with the Syrian people and the Syrian state’s closest ally, Iran. The conflict in Syria exposes that the machinations revealed back in 2007-2008 by Hersh, are still being carried out in earnest today.

Clearly, US-Canadian claims that Iran is somehow involved in harboring Al Qaeda within its borders, when it has been the West for years propping them up specifically to overthrow the Iranian government, are utterly absurd. In reality, while the West uses Al Qaeda’s presence both within Iran and along it peripheries to undermine and ultimately overthrow the Iranian government, it in turn uses these very terror organizations to induce paralyzing fear across Western populations in order to consolidate and expand power at home.

“The world is not divided between East and West. You are American, I am Iranian, we don’t know each other, but we talk together and we understand each other perfectly. The difference between you and your government is much bigger than the difference between you and me. And the difference between me and my government is much bigger than the difference between me and you. And our governments are very much the same.”

Center for a Stateless Society

On March 19 Donald Rumsfeld, former US “Defense” Secretary and ongoing sociopath and moral leper, celebrated the tenth anniversary of the Iraq War with this tweet: “10 yrs ago began the long, difficult work of liberating 25 mil Iraqis. All who played a role in history deserve our respect & appreciation.”

Just what “liberation” meant to Rummy, Dummy and Scummy can be seen from the agenda Paul Bremer implemented as head of the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) in Iraq. Imagine the kind of “What I Would Do If I Were Absolute Dictator For A Year” list an entire army of ALEC staffers and Heritage Foundation interns would come up with, with the RIAA, MPAA, Monsanto, Halliburton and Blackwater egging them on, and that’s basically what Bremer did to Iraq.

Bremer’s CPA was a classic “night watchman state.” Remember all those priceless historical treasures the looters “liberated” from the National Museum while the U.S. looked the other way? With Night Watchman Bremer’s go-ahead, global corporate looters gave the Iraqi economy just as thorough a ransacking.

Bremer’s infamous “100 Orders” repealed virtually all of the Saddam-era legal structure — except for the 1987 Labor Code, which prohibited collective bargaining in the state sector. The state sector encompassed two hundred state-owned firms (a major chunk of the industrial economy), and Bremer wanted to “privatize” them in insider sweetheart deals with crony capitalists. Legalizing unions might gum up the works.

The CPA refused to unfreeze the assets of the Iraqi Federation of Trade Unions (IFTU). Bremer ordered US troops to storm the IFTU headquarters and kept it closed down for months. A local American commander helpfully told an imprisoned union organizer that Iraq was not a sovereign country, and that so long as it was under the administration of the CPA Bremer didn’t want unions.

Bremer’s 100 Orders also included Order 81 on “Patent, Industrial Design, Undisclosed Information, Integrated Circuits and Plant Variety,” which updated “intellectual property” law to “meet current internationally-recognized standards of protection” like the WIPO Copyright Treaty and Uruguay Round TRIPS Accord (which the U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act was also passed to implement). Among other things, the new law criminalized saving seeds for the next year.

The entire legal regime Bremer implemented by decree was to remain the law of the land even after the restoration of sovereignty, until — and unless — it was supervened by a new constitution. The so-called “transfer of sovereignty” was to a government appointed by the CPA, enabling Bremer to evade the restriction in international law against a conqueror directly selling off state assets — while also leaving in place an “interim constitution” based on Bremer’s 100 Orders.

Article 26 of Bremer’s Constitution, stated that “[t]he laws, regulations, orders and directives issued by the Coalition Provisional Authority … shall remain in force” under the interim government, until the “sovereign” puppet regime was replaced by general elections. As Naomi Klein observed in “Baghdad Year Zero” (Harper’s, September 2004):

“Bremer had found his legal loophole: There would be a window — seven months — when the occupation was officially over but before general elections were scheduled to take place. Within this window, the Hague and Geneva Conventions’ bans on privatization would no longer apply, but Bremer’s own laws, thanks to Article 26, would stand. During these seven months, foreign investors could come to Iraq and sign forty-year contracts to buy up Iraqi assets. If a future elected Iraqi government decided to change the rules, investors could sue for compensation.”

The “interim constitution” was designed to make its own replacement by referendum extremely difficult — among other things, requiring any new constitution actually approved by the people of Iraq (as opposed to decreed by Bremer’s fiat) to receive at least thirty percent of the vote in sixteen of Iraq’s eighteen provinces.

On top of everything else, Bremer appointed a whole slew of ministerial officials to five-year terms that would override any later decisions by an independent government.

Meanwhile, a “debt forgiveness” plan negotiated with creditor nations under IMF auspices used debt contracted by Saddam — debt that should have been treated as odious, and hence null and void — as a whip to coerce adherence to the Washington Consensus economic agenda.

This is the “liberation” agenda for which Rumsfeld and his fellow war criminals murdered hundreds of thousands, and physically crippled or psychologically scarred untold hundreds of thousands more. If that’s the kind of “liberation” you like, may you soon join Rumsfeld in hell.

The Empire is most definitely striking back. Between the huge and secretive data center being built in Utah to intercept and analyze the world’s communications, Barack Obama‘s newly signed executive order that allows him “emergency” powers and the near-passage of SOPA, the powers-that-be are making it clear they intend to try to control, more and more effectively, what we call the Internet Reformation.

It sounds like some sort of international company but actually it’s a huge but low-key UN bureaucracy – and it’s the latest danger to Internet freedom and maybe the gravest.

You know it’s got to be bad when an article on the AOL’s Huffington Post warns about it. AOL/Huffington from an editorial standpoint is not exactly known to be alarmist about what are laughingly referred to as “conspiracy theories.”

But the article, written by Edward J. Black, President and CEO, Computer and Communications Industry, is a sober warning about yet another world-spanning UN facility that has the ability to create treaties affecting everyone.

The article is entitled, “UN’s ITU Could Become Next Internet Freedom Threat” and Black makes the case that those in the US who are concerned about Internet censorship need to look abroad as well as at home.

Once filtering, censorship or traffic-redirecting tools are developed and deployed, they can be used for a variety of reasons – not just for the purposes that first got the regulations enacted. Some of the lessons learned from the dangers of legislation like SOPA should be the need for forbearance and a well-researched, multi-stakeholder derived policy to avoid unintended consequences.

We’ve been concerned about similar efforts that could result in a treaty giving a United Nations agency new power to “manage” the Internet. Russia, along with China, North Korea, Iran and other notably nondemocratic countries, are advocating for international regulation of the Internet through a treaty-based organization in the United Nations – the International Telecommunications Union (ITU).

These countries are also asking for a “cyber arms control treaty.” But the real goal is to give governments the international legal cover to declare information they don’t like a “danger to the state” and therefore the equivalent of cyber warfare so they can censor it. An article in the World Affairs Journal outlines Russia’s patient, organized effort over more than a decade.

The article warns, “If diplomats are not careful, one by-product of a push to regulate state-on-state cyber conflict could be a new effort to subject Internet activity to political scrutiny.” It points to the efforts at the ITU as a telling example of this trend.

These countries have also pushed this agenda in other venues:

• Suggesting at the UN General Assembly in 2011 that a code of conduct for Internet use should be mandated in international law (and conveniently giving the governments of the world the right to determine what is outside the limits of the code);

• Proposing to create a new UN agency that would be a ‘super agency’ responsible for managing all aspects of Internet policy – with, naturally, governments having the only vote.

There are warning signs that 2012 is lining up to be particularly important in this fight.

The ITU is certainly a good vehicle for these sorts of maneuverings. It’s brief is almost ludicrously broad and vague and there are plans in the works for what Black calls a “major ITU conference.”

The conference is to be entitled, ominously, the “World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT),” and according to Black, it will be used by China and Russia to make a play for expanded authority over the Internet.

Black cites America’s FCC Commissioner, Robert McDowell, who wrote in a notable Wall Street Journal editorial last month, that proponents of Internet freedom “need to play offense not just defense by encouraging all interested parties, including governments and the ITU, to examine the economic and social benefits of the open Internet and to broaden the multi-stakeholder approach to managing Internet concerns.”

Now break that last wordy sentence down into normal English and what McDowell is saying is that people concerned about the Internet ought to use the agencies of state control to preserve and expand freedom.

I have a more cynical vision of this kind of argument. Black is probably correct that 2012 is an important year for the foes of the Internet who want a controlled, rigid and highly authoritarian electronic facility.

But I’m not sure that the ITU is the place where this struggle will play out. No, the ITU is likely going to be host to a kind of power-elite dialectic that will pit the forces of Internet “freedom” against the forces of control and repression. This is fairly predictable.

Out of this conversation, no doubt, will come a “compromise” that will be authoritarian in its conclusions though not as bad as some fear. It will be implemented via treaty and then expanded on until it will be terrible indeed. That’s how thepower elite dialectic works.

You see, there is a power elite that wants to run the world, even if we don’t like to admit it. But reality is what it is.The Internet, a mistake from their point of view, and a big one, is standing in their way. They are attacking it on all fronts to try to damp down what we have called the “Internet Reformation.”

In fact, from my point of view, the Internet Reformation is something much larger than any treaty or even any global accord. The old men of the power elite are fighting hard to maintain their information and the power to utilize the propaganda of their dominant social themes.

These fear-based memes like global warming and Peak Oil, are intended to frighten middle classes into giving up power and wealth to global facilities specially prepared to administer various forms international authority.

This approach worked well in the 20th century but is not working so well in the 21st. In fact, as more and more information has emerged on the Internet about the Way the World Really Works, the elites are increasingly turning toward war, economic chaos and authoritarian legislation to retain their grip.

The trouble with global technological revolutions such as the one represented by the ‘Net is that they are extremely broad based and hard to supervise. That’s why we’ve argued that it will take decades to fully control what technology has unlocked, and by then new technologies may cause nerw problems for the power elite.

There are forces in the world that have an agenda that is at once globalist and repressive. These forces may go back hundreds or even thousands of years. But in fact that is just the point. History seems to show us that sometimes elite control is more effective and all-encompassing than at other times.

Here, in these modest pages, we’ve argued that the Internet has sparked a mysterious “hive mind” process and that the truth-telling the Internet has unlocked has reverberations beyond what can be easily explained. I would argue that it is somewhat simplistic to view the Internet simply as a kind of electronic tablet that can be blocked or erased at will.

The interactions between humans and the facilities of the Internet are likely a good deal richer and more complex than is commonly presented. And there is the tool-making issue as well. Humans tend to exploit cutting-edge tools to their fullest, sooner or later.

A facility like the Internet is complex indeed, and it is a moving target. Yesterday’s censorship may not be applicable tomorrow. China’s leaders, for instance, now demand that all Internet users use their real name. Yet the Internet in its current incarnation is an essentially anonymous device.

In the US, a huge information-gathering facility is being built, as I mentioned at the beginnning of this article, but once again, I would argue that such efforts do not fully acknowledge the complexity of the interactions between the Internet and its human users.

The Internet is unusual because it allows people, especially young people, to interact with it independently. Whole, complex facilities can be created and then connected to the larger system. Not so long ago we wrote about a BBCarticle suggesting that the Internet ought to be torn down and rebuilt in a way that would make it more conducive to monitoring. Too late.

The real problem with Internet authoritarian control is that in the modern era, the one-world conspiracy has reiled on persuasion and the use of dominant social themes when it comes to creating globalism. The powers-that-be have used these tools because to show the naked face of aggression is to invite confrontation.

The more obvious the attempts are at censoring and controlling the Internet, the more fierce the push-back will become. Additionally, as governments, at the behest of top-level power elite, make these attempts, the good will between citizens and the authorities is eroded. This is a negative trend for those in charge.

Add to this that the Internet is a moving target and that authoritarian solutions will constantly have to be upgraded and redesigned and you have a recipe for continual conflict on a legislative level and also within a wider sphere. That sort of conflict does not bode well for an elite that has relied on suasion and stealth to pursue its agenda in the past.

Ultimately, as we often point out here at DB, the Internet is a process not an episode. Even an effective solution that retards certain aspects of Internet communication may not work so well tomorrow. It is no doubt a frustrating situation for those who want to control the world and steer it in certain directions.

They should have been more careful, but apparently they missed the ‘Net’s initial significance. Now they are playing “catch up.” This is something to keep in mind.

More than a year ago, I reported on the mission of Frank “Bagman of Empire” Wisner to Egypt (“Egypt: Let the Looting Begin,” Center for a Stateless Society, February 4, 2011). Wisner, formerly of Enron and AIG, was Obama’s plenipotentiary to Egypt, tasked with managing the post-Mubarak succession in as U.S.-friendly a direction as possible.

Wisner’s father, by the way, was another Bagman of Empire; as a founding spook of the OSS and CIA he managed the overthrow of Arbenz and Mossadegh. Wisner had co-chaired (with another noted bagman, James Baker) a commission that developed a post-Saddam vision for the governance of Iraq. Just reading the “100 Orders” issued by the Coalition Provisional Authority, and the corporate looting pursuant tothem, should give you a good idea of Wisner’s agenda.

Richard Moore wrote twelve years ago, in “Escaping the Matrix” (Whole Earth Catalog, Summer 2000) about the Empire importing technologies of repression from the imperial Periphery to the Core and using them to manage the domestic population.

It’s nothing new. It’s as old as Caesar bringing the legions from Gaul back across the Rubicon. But now it’s being done in reverse. A high-level maestro of political repression from the American domestic police apparatus has found lucrative employment in Bahrain.

Timoney had already established himself as a notable carpetbagger of repression within the United States. As Philadelphia’s Police Commissioner, he supervised the police riot at the August 2000 GOP Convention. His Gestapo tactics there, and later as police chief of Miami during the anti-FTAA protests, were dress rehearsals for the police repression of Occupy protests in hundreds of cities across America: Gassing and breaking the bones of unarmed people, pre-emptively arresting organizers, planting evidence — you name it, Timoney’s been there and done that.

From the outset of the Seattle movement, Timoney was its J. Edgar Hoover — warning shrilly of the “International Anarchist Conspiracy” to disrupt meetings of neo-liberal institutions. He agitated relentlessly to apply the RICO statute to the anti-Globalization movement. Timoney is a close associate of Tom Ridge, going back to the latter’s provision of political cover to Timoney’s police riot, and after the post-9/11 establishment of the US Department of Homeland Security was rumored to have close informal ties to much of the Department’s leadership. Although his prospects for high office in Fatherland Security never materialized, he went on to an extremely lucrative career as lobbyist for the security-industrial complex. And as police chief of Miami, he got a chance to further refine his jackbooted thuggery from the Philly days.

Now Timoney — along with fellow carpetbagger John Yates, assistant commissioner of the London Metropolitan Police — serves the Bahraini royal government. You know, the despotic Bahraini state that’s been engaged in brutal and murderous repression of the Arab Spring uprising there for the past year. Timoney, it seems, is for sale to any petty tyrant with petrodollars burning a hole in his pocket and wants to do a really high-class job (ahem) “using chemical weapons against his own people.”

It’s been said that to a man with a hammer, every problem looks like a nail. Give people a bunch of big hammers, and they’ll start looking for new ways to use them. Likewise, if your Empire has a need for torturers, thugs and detention camp guards, you’ll find all the volunteers you need to keep Abu Ghraib, Gitmo or Philly running. But once you have those guys (and gals, pace Lynndie England), they become an established constituency.

Somebody once quipped that the French Empire was built by retired army officers. Marijuana criminalization began, in part, as patronage for G-men unemployed by the repeal of Prohibition. Sometimes, likewise, MPs who get a taste for inflicting pain and domination on the powerless in squalid holes like Abu Ghraib or Baghram AFB come home and decide to become cops or prison guards (remember Dim in A Clockwork Orange?). And sometimes American cops become advisers to foreign despots’ secret police.

All uniformed thugs are brothers under the skin. And repression is becoming an industry without borders.

About the writer:

C4SS (c4ss.org) Research Associate Kevin Carson is a contemporary mutualist author and individualist anarchist whose written work includesStudies in Mutualist Political Economy, Organization Theory: A Libertarian Perspective, and The Homebrew Industrial Revolution: A Low-Overhead Manifesto, all of which are freely available online. Carson has also written for such print publications as The Freeman: Ideas on Libertyand a variety of internet-based journals and blogs, including Just Things, The Art of the Possible, the P2P Foundation and his own Mutualist Blog.

I’ve been an evangelical Christian since I was a child. I’ve been in the Gospel ministry all of my adult life. I attended two evangelical Christian colleges, received honorary degrees from two others, and taught and preached in several others. I’ve attended many of the largest evangelical pastors’ gatherings and have been privileged to speak at Christian gatherings–large and small–all over America. I have been part of the inner workings of evangelical ministry for nearly 40 years. I think I learned a thing or two about evangelical/fundamentalist Christianity in America. And I’m here to tell you: I don’t like what I see happening these days!

Let’s get this straight right out of the gate: nothing touched by man can be perfect, because none of us is perfect. There is no perfect church, perfect school, perfect mission board, perfect Sunday School class, perfect pastor, perfect deacon, or perfect Christian. Until the afterlife, we are all yet encased in Adamic flesh, complete with human weaknesses and imperfections. And only the Pharisaical among us are too proud to admit it.

That said, I do think it is more than fair to say that, historically, Christians have always attempted to be–and have always publicly taught the importance of being–peacemakers. Historically, Christians have preached–and tried to practice–love and brotherhood. The early church was born in a baptism of love and unity. Oh sure, there were always individual misunderstandings and differences, but, on the whole, the church was a loving, caring, compassionate ecclesia.

Mind you, Christians historically were not afraid or ashamed to defend themselves, their families, and their country. The Lord Jesus, Himself (the Prince of Peace), allowed His disciples to carry personal defense weapons (see Luke 22:36,38). Yes, while some Christian sects were conscientious pacifists, these were the exception, not the rule. The vast majority of Christian believers understood the Biblical, Natural Law principle of self-defense. But believing in the right of lawful, God-ordained self-defense was never to be confused with warmongering.

So, what has happened to turn the most peace-loving institution the world has ever known (the New Testament church) into the biggest cheerleaders for war? I’m talking about un-provoked, illegal, unconstitutional, unbiblical–even secret–wars of aggression. The biggest cheerleaders for the unprovoked, unconstitutional, pre-emptive attack and invasion of Iraq were evangelical Christians. Ditto for the war in Afghanistan, the bombing of Libya, the attacks in Yemen, etc. Who is calling for the bombing of Iran? Evangelical Christians. Who cheers for sending more and more troops all over the world to maim and kill more and more people (including innocents)? Evangelical Christians. Shoot (pun intended)! Most evangelical Christians didn’t even bat an eye when the federal government sent military and police personnel to murder American citizens, including old men, women, and children–Christian old men, women, and children, no less–outside Waco, Texas.

And where are today’s evangelical Christians giving a second thought regarding their fellow Christian brothers and sisters in many of these Middle Eastern countries that are being persecuted, imprisoned, tortured, and killed by the puppet regimes being put in power by the US government–at US taxpayer (including Christian taxpayer) expense? I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but more Christians have been persecuted under the US-imposed regime in Iraq than were ever persecuted when Saddam Hussein was in power. Oh! And don’t forget that it was the US government that was responsible for putting Saddam Hussein in power to begin with. The US government set up Osama bin Laden, too. But I digress.

In addition to the “white” wars (the ones everyone knows about), the US government authorizes some 70 black ops commando raids in some 120 countries EVERY DAY. In fact, the secret, black ops military of the US is so large today it now totals more personnel than the ENTIREMILITARY OF CANADA!

A recent report noted, “In 120 countries across the globe, troops from Special Operations Command carry out their secret war of high-profile assassinations, low-level targeted killings, capture/kidnap operations, kick-down-the-door night raids, joint operations with foreign forces, and training missions with indigenous partners as part of a shadowy conflict unknown to most Americans. Once ‘special’ for being small, lean, outsider outfits, today they are special for their power, access, influence, and aura.”

Yet, how much of this knowledge would even faze the average evangelical Christian today? All we hear from today’s “churches” is “bomb,” “attack,” “wipe them out,” etc. Then, at the same time, they get all emotional about sending missionaries to the same countries that they had just cheered-on the US military in raining down missiles of death and destruction upon (to bring salvation to the lucky ones that weren’t killed, I suppose).

And who are the ones that belittle and impugn Ron Paul? Evangelical Christians. Why? Because he tells the truth about America’s foreign policy being responsible for much of the hatred and bitterness erupting in foreign countries against us. I guarantee you that many of the “conservative” Republicans who booed Dr. Paul’s comments to this regard at the GOP Presidential debate this week would identify themselves as evangelical Christians.

The disciples of our Lord were called “Christians” first by the Gentiles of Antioch, because of the manner in which the disciples reminded them of Christ’s nature and teachings. I never thought I would hear myself say what I’m about to say, but the truth is, the term “Christian” today means anything but Christ-like. To many people today, “Christian” refers to some warmongering, mean-spirited, throw-anyone-to-the-wolves-who-crosses-them person, who then has the audacity to look down their nose in contempt against anyone who disagrees with them for even the smallest reason. And the word “church” has the stigma of being simply an enclave of warmongers to many people today. And that, my friends, is one reason so many people are so turned off with today’s Christianity. And I can’t say that I blame them. I’m turned off too!

Am I a pacifist? Absolutely not! Do I believe an individual, a family, a community, or a nation has the right to protect and defend itself? I absolutely do! And the fellow who breaks into my home or who attacks my loved ones will personally discover I believe that! But this blind support for illegal, immoral, unconstitutional war is anything but Christian. Not only is it turning people against our country among people abroad, it is turning our own countrymen against the Christ we Christians claim to love right here at home.

I dare say that the modern Warfare State would grind to a screeching halt tomorrow if evangelical Christians would simply stop supporting it! And the thing that most evangelical Christians fail to realize is that the Warfare State is one of the primary tools that the evil one is using to usher in his devilish New World Order that even babes in Christ know to be of Satan. Hence, Christians are helping to promote the very thing that Satan, himself, is using to enslave them.

Yes, I’ve been an evangelical Christian for most of my life and an evangelical pastor for all of my adult life. And if we Christians do not quickly repent of this bloodlust that seems to dominate evangelical Christianity today (spiritually and militarily), the word that was first used by un-churched Gentiles to describe Christ’s followers will be used as a curse-word to describe those who facilitated the ruination of our country.

P.S. We will be hosting a giveaway soon and you will have the chance to win a copy of my DVD, “Romans 13: The True Meaning of Submission”! That’s right, my four-part message series on Romans 13, all four messages on one DVD, and you can have a chance to win a copy! For instructions about how to enter this giveaway (on Facebook only), visit the Chuck Baldwin and Liberty Fellowship pages.

I thank you in advance for entering and sharing these pages with your Facebook friends! We regularly update these pages with my editorials and any announcements that you will want to know about. This message of freedom and liberty is a message everyone needs to hear!

*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link:

Women suffering from ‘worst violence in history of modern Iraq’

(PhysOrg.com) — Women have been left defenceless and at the mercy of militia groups in the aftermath of the Iraq war in 2003 according to research from the University of Birmingham.

The struggle taking place in Iraq and its impact on women following the dismantling of the state has been investigated by a senior academic in Islamic and Middle Eastern Studies at the University of Birmingham who suggests the war has had detrimental consequences for equality and women’s rights.

Dr. Haifaa Jawad’s paper, ‘From liberation to resistance; women in Iraq’ examines the involvement of women in the resistance movement, both Islamist and secular, through the eyes and experiences of women present at the scene and subjected to patriarchal and political forces.

Dr. Jawad commented: “The 2003 war on Iraq which aimed among other things, to improve human rights, has had a negative impact on women who are now suffering the worst violence in the history of modern Iraq. The struggle currently taking place in Iraq at the hands of militia groups who have introduced their own laws is having a devastating impact on women.”

Dr. Jawad will be presenting this research during a one-day conference taking place at the University of Birmingham on Monday 27 June, where specialists from across the country will explore the current discourse between women, Islamism and resistance in the Middle East.

Hosted by the Centre for Islamic Studies, ‘Women, Islamism and resistance in the Arab world will incorporate a series of lectures delivered by experts from universities across the country. Key themes set to be explored include feminism in Egypt, the right of Palestinian women to resist and Islamic doctrine and praxis in the contemporary world.

Dr. Jawad explained: “The relationship between women and Islamism in the Arab world is very complicated. The emergence of Islamism in recent decades calls into question women’s rights. Some claim that Islamism has the ability to empower women and allow them to play a broad public role, but whether this is actually occurring will be explored by a group of respected specialists during this one-day event.”

Experts from the University of Birmingham and the Universities of Cambridge, Lancaster and Westminster will be discussing and debating the current discourse between women, Islamism and female forms of resistance in the Arab world. Highlights will include University of Birmingham Research Fellow Dr Laura McDonald’s exploration of Islamist Women in the Middle East and the implications they have on Muslim women’s activisms in the West and PhD researcher Elisabeth Buergener’s discussion on the post-Islamist revivalism, Syrian women and the Da’wa movement.

As I’m writing this, Egypt is enmeshed in turmoil. The people have literally taken to the streets in opposition to oppressive government. It is about time, and it seems they have had enough. I pray that they are successful in overthrowing the entire Mubarak regime. But why did they wait so long? The long-time U.S puppet dictator, Hosni Mubarak, has been in power for over 29 years, and during that time has been able to amass a huge fortune for himself and his family at the expense of Egypt’s citizens. His rule, like that of most dictators, has been filled with corruption, war, murder, torture, and an abhorrent “Emergency Law Rule.” (For more on Mubarak and Emergency Law Rule, see here.)

Under Mubarak’s “Emergency Law Rule,” police powers are vastly increased, constitutional law and individual rights are suspended, and completecensorship is legalized. This law forbids any non-governmental political activity like street demonstrations, non-approved political organizations, and all “unregistered” financial donations. In addition, and even more heinous, is that under this law, the government has the right to imprison individuals for any period and for virtually any reason. They may be kept in prison without trial for as long as the government desires. Considering recent events there, with police and military actions, rules and curfews, murder of innocents, and the shutdown of communications, including the Internet, this evil law is obviously in place. Does any of this sound familiar? It should, because the U.S government has either committed many of these same crimes, or is threatening to do so. Just consider Guantanamo, secret renditions, black prison sites, suspension (or elimination) of habeas corpus, incarceration without charges or trial, suppression of speech, spying and wiretapping, and brutal torture. The U.S. government and its police-state accomplices have committed all of this and much more for some time now.

The United States government and its corporate partners in crime have already achieved a level of corruption beyond any in history. I base this on the monumental scope and reach of this empire. Many I fear will doubt this bold statement, but before you do, be very careful not to dig too deep. If you do, be prepared for a startling dose of truth and reality. This newest round of tyrannical behavior began with the passage of the atrocious USA PATRIOT Act, the Military Commissions Act, the development of the Department of Homeland Security, the legalizing of assassinations of Americans, and more civil liberty destruction continues constantly. This does not include the atrocities being perpetrated by American forces overseas such as aggressive wars of occupation, operating military bases in over 170 countries, infrastructure devastation causing the displacement of millions of innocents, torture, and murder. Even with all this, the surface has barely been scratched. Most all police in the U.S. have now become militarized and federalized. Large-scale holding centers have been opened or constructed, and the regular military has taken up residence on American soil; not for the purpose of protection from enemies from afar, but strictly for the control of Americans. I’ve written about this here and here.

While the U.S. is obviously one of the most advanced nations on earth, with a very high standard of living, politically speaking, our country is deteriorating at a very accelerated pace. But most in this country still cling to the false notion that America is the land of the free and the home of the brave, and that all other countries, especially those in the Middle East, are either far inferior, or simply third-world parasites with a populace that is less than human. Those who continue to cling to this most arrogant and farcical notion will be the last to grasp the reality that in many regards, the U.S. political structure is little different than that of its so-called enemies. The reason this truth is still so elusive to most is due to the fact that the general citizenry of this country has over time been dumbed down by the government school system. In addition, our society has become one based on almost total dependence, with little concept of personal responsibility or self-reliance, one without morals, and one that is consumed with a belief in the myth of American exceptionalism. This distorted conventional thinking will have to change dramatically before any true progress can be made.

The Imperial United State of America is headed straight to hell, and without an honest awakening by the conceited, and seemingly unconcerned sheep-like masses, this departure from grace will happen before most are aware of the imminent collapse.

This, in my opinion, is why the revolutionary events in Egypt and elsewhere in the world are so important. We all can learn valuable lessons from these revolts. We can learn first that tyrannical governments can be ousted and overturned. We can learn that freedom is still entrenched in the hearts and minds of the human species, regardless of where one lives or was born. We can learn that violence is never the way to achieve a proper revolution unless self-defense is absolutely necessary. We can learn that the people can achieve great strides toward liberty even if the odds are stacked against them. We can learn that a people who do not possess those inherent rights to life, liberty, and property are nothing more than slaves!

The U.S. is headed toward total tyranny in my opinion. I don’t think this is arguable. The government and its controlling partners are in perpetual war with those who never attacked or threatened to attack us. The military power structure is entrenched in most all countries around the world. We are now a people that are spied upon, groped, x-rayed, harassed, and stolen from on a daily basis. The United States while considered the freest country on earth, has the highest incarceration rate in the world. With less than 5% of the world’s population, the U.S. houses over 23% of the world’s prison population. According to the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1 in every 32 adults, or 3.1% of the population was either on probation, in jail or prison, or on parole in 2009. To add to this insanity, approximately 70 percent of those “criminals” are being held for victimless “crimes”; this due mostly to the evil war on drugs, which is nothing other than an anti-liberty prohibition used to expand the power and scope of the State. The number of normal citizens that are abused and beaten by the domestic police state gendarmes is increasing beyond imagination. Our government can now legally assassinate its own citizens, and is threatening to shut down our main lines of communication should it deem it necessary. This cannot be allowed to happen!

The U.S. government, as is true of all governments, has nothing, creates nothing, and produces nothing. It can only steal and kill in order to survive. By definition, as the great Ludwig von Mises pointed out, government is force, and force is the absolute antithesis of freedom and liberty. Therefore, government is always against freedom, and does everything in its power to squelch the voice of the individual, and to squash the natural rights of man. Government literally lives and thrives on the blood and sweat of others, a literal vampire in disguise living off its gullible host. That host of course, is the very people who put the government in power in the first place. This is an irony that is almost impossible to bear.

Considering the modern history of the developed nations, the masses have continually sought a governing system ruled over by their peers who are simply common men. But all men are fallible. Those same fallible men when placed in a position of power have invariably become tyrants. This seems to be the natural progression. Why then, have we never learned from the past? Why do the people of this earth continue to place themselves in the servitude of other common men in government; common men who when given the chance will always abuse the trust given them?

We have little time left. When tyranny rears its ugly head for all to see, as is the case now in the U.S., then it is time to cut off the dragon’s head. The people of this country should look upon the Egyptians as prognosticators of our future. We should all understand that if we simply continue to behave as serfs, we will continue to be serfs. All great societies in history have fallen for the same reasons, and America is no different. Instead of repeating history, wouldn’t it be better to change it? Wouldn’t it be better to rid ourselves of this albatross we alone have created? Even if the masses wanted to continue to have a government, wouldn’t it be better if that government had no power to destroy freedom? Wouldn’t it be better if we were truly free?

The essential feature of government is the enforcement of its decrees by beating, killing, and imprisoning. Those who are asking for more government interference are asking ultimately for more compulsion and less freedom.

TEHERAN – Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says Egypt’s popular uprising shows a new Middle East is emerging, one that will have no signs of Israel and US “interference.”

The Iranian president spoke as the country marked the 32nd anniversary of the 1979 Islamic Revolution. His remarks came hours after Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak refused to step down, angering hundreds of thousands of Egyptians who have been demanding he relinquish his three-decade grip on power.

Ahmadinejad says Egyptians have the right to live in freedom and choose their own government.

Iran crushed opposition protests against Ahmadinejad’s disputed 2009 re-election and on Thursday, Iranian opposition leader Mahdi Karroubi was placed under house arrest because of calls for a rally in support of Egyptian protesters.

On Thursday, Iranian opposition leader Mahdi Karroubi announced via his website, Sahamnews.org, that he has been placed under house arrest, because he called for a rally in support of anti-government demonstrations in Egypt.

Karroubi petitioned the government for permission to hold a rally, but State Prosecutor Gholam Hossein Mohseni Ejehi rejected the request, warning of repercussions should a demonstration take place.

The conversation between President Barack Obama and Saudi King Abdullah early Thursday, Feb. 10, was the most acerbic the US president has ever had with an Arab ruler, DEBKAfile’s Middle East sources report. They had a serious falling-out on the Egyptian crisis which so enraged the king that some US and Middle East sources reported he suffered a sudden heart attack. Rumors that he had died rocked the world financial and oil markets that morning and were denied by an adviser to the ruling family. Some Gulf sources say he has had heart attacks in the past.

Those sources disclose that the call which Obama put into Abdullah, who is recuperating from back surgery at his palace in Morocco, brought their relations into deep crisis and placed in jeopardythe entire edifice of US Iran and Middle East policies.

The king chastised the president for his treatment of Egypt and its president Hosni Muhbarak calling it a disaster that would generate instability in the region and imperil all the moderate Arab rulers and regimes which had backed the United States until now. Abdullah took Obama to task for ditching America’s most faithful ally in the Arab world and vowed that if the US continues to try and get rid of Mubarak, the Saudi royal family would bend all its resources to undoing Washington’s plans for Egypt and nullifying their consequences.

According to British intelligence sources in London, the Saudi King pledged to make up the losses to Egypt if Washington cuts off military and economic aid to force Mubarak to resign. He would personally instruct the Saudi treasury to transfer to the embattled Egyptian ruler the exact amounts he needs for himself and his army to stand up to American pressure.

Through all the ups and downs of Saudi-US relations since the 1950s no Saudi ruler has ever threatened direct action against American policy.
A senior Saudi source told the London Times that “Mubarak and King Abdullah are not just allies, they are close friends, and the King is not about to see his friend cast aside and humiliated.”

Indeed, our sources add, the king at the age of 87 is fearful that in the event of a situation developing in Saudi Arabia like the uprising in Egypt, Washington would dump him just like Mubarak.

DEBKAfile’s intelligence sources add that replacement aid for Egypt was not the only card in Abdullah’s deck. He informed Obama that without waiting for events in Egypt to play out or America’s response, he had ordered the process set in train for raising the level of Riyadh‘s diplomatic and military ties with Tehran. Invitations had gone out from Riyadh for Iranian delegations to visit the main Saudi cities.

Abdullah stressed he had more than one bone to pick with Obama. The king accused the US president of turning his back not only on Mubarak but on another beleaguered American ally, the former Lebanese Prime Minister Sa’ad Hariri, when he was toppled by Iran’s surrogate Hizballah.

Our sources in Washington report that all of President Obama’s efforts to pacify the Saudi king and explain his Egyptian policy fell on deaf ears.
Arab sources in London reported Tuesday, Feb. 8, that a special US presidential emissary was dispatched to Morocco with a message of explanation for the king. He was turned away. This is not confirmed by US or Saudi sources.

The initiation of dialogue between Riyadh and Tehran is the most dramatic fallout in the region from the crisis in Egypt. Its is a boon for the ayatollahs who are treated the sight of pro-Western regimes either fading under the weight of domestic uprisings, or turning away from the US as Saudi Arabia is doing now.

This development is also of pivotal importance for Israel. Saudi Arabia’s close friendship with the Mubarak regime dovetailed neatly with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s alignment with Egypt and provided them with common policy denominators. The opening of the Saudi door to the Iranian push toward the Red Sea and Suez Canal tightens the Iranian siege ring around Israel.

Signs of friction between Washington and Riyadh were noticeable this week even before President Obama’s call to King Abdullah. Some American media reported the discovery that Saudi oil reserves were a lot smaller than previously estimated. And Saudi media ran big headlines, most untypically, alleging the US embassy and consulate in Dahran were paying sub-contractors starvation wages of $4.3 a day for cleaning work and $3.3 a day for gardening work.

Thursday, January 13, 2011
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
Editor of NaturalNews.com

(NaturalNews) Discussions of weather control technology used to be limited to the hushed gossip of conspiracy theorists, but it turns out the conspiracy theorists were right (again). Today in Abu Dhabi, scientists have successfully manipulated entire weather systems, causing up tofifty downpours of rainacross the Al Ain region the desert nation over the last year.

It’s all being accomplished by a team of scientists working for Sheikh Khalifa bin Zayed Al Nahyan, the president of United Arab Emirates. They have erected entire fields of giant ionizers to generate waves of negative ions which rise into the lower atmosphere and attract dust particles. The dust particles, in turn, attract condensation from the ambient air, and when enough condensation is achieved, the clouds can’t hold the water anymore and a downpour of rain is unleashed. The whole system was devices by a Swiss company named Metro Systems International.

This last year saw huge rainstorms over Abu Dhabi during July and August — months that are normally bone dry in the desert. The success of the project astonished even theMax Planck Institute for Meteorology, whose former director reportedly said, “Maybe this is a most important point for mankind.” (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet…)

Where are the skeptics now?

What I find really interesting in all this is that, for decades, the so-called “skeptics” have insisted that all this talk about weather control is pure conspiracy theory. If you tell a typical conventional doctor that “weather control technology can make it rain in the desert,” they’ll look at you as if you were some kind of nut.

HAARP appears to be an experimental weather control technology being operated by the U.S. government right now, shrouded in secrecy. The field of HAARP ionizers looks eerily similar to those set up in Abu Dhabi (http://www.haarp.alaska.edu/), and the entire project is understood by those who have really looked into it as a “weather weapon” capable of “potentially triggering floods, droughts, hurricanes and earthquakes.” (http://www.fromthewilderness.com/fr…)

Today we know that weather control technology works. It’s up and running right now in Abu Dhabi, and there’s little question that controlling the weather has many applications, including military and economic applications.

So for those who raise their eyebrows when you say “weather control,” just answer them with “Abu Dhabi.” Fifty thunderstorms prove it already works.

Going into high school in 2001, I had no idea what the future held for me. Then 9/11 happened. I had the Bushian mentality (being raised in a staunch Republican household) of “let’s go get some,” and since he had said that I could either be “either with the terrorists or against the terrorists,” I wanted to be against the terrorists like every other American. My motivation and will to live were at their highest they had ever been after I enlisted in the Marine Corps. I thought to myself, “I am going to make a difference in this world. I am going to fight for our freedom!” I graduated from high school a semester early in January of 2005 to attend Marine Corps Basic Training. I deployed twice to the killing fields of Iraq, and I was completely oblivious to the fact that the war was based on total lies. I had friends who were maimed and murdered all in the name of nothing genuinely patriotic. I wish more of them were able to read the articles at lewrockwell.com and campaignforliberty.com before they made the fateful choice of enlisting.

I barely made it out of my first deployment alive, after a few close calls with IEDS and mortars (I was a M1A1 tank driver and later a gunner), which in turn lead to the collapse of my morality. I guess it is a little difficult to keep your morals when you witness the carnage most of us have faced there, like children running out in the streets getting their heads blown off, and suicide bombers blowing themselves up and killing my mentors. I came back from the war a soulless degenerate. I started hating Muslims for what I thought they stood for from my experience in the Middle East. While on my post deployment leave I would drive past the local mosque and look with pure disgust. I would think to myself, “Look at all of these terrorists,” as I held a death grip on my steering wheel. It is amazing what war and war propaganda does to the mind. Man, was I wrong.

At that point, my morality had sunk into the abyss. I started drinking heavily to help numb my hatred towards life itself, which helped pass the time until my next deployment to Iraq. My next deployment consisted of wondering around the desert aimlessly looking for “bad guys.” This was kind of a metaphor for what was going on in my mind. I felt completely lost about everything, and I thought to myself, “What the hell are we doing here?” I was discharged, somehow honorably, in 2009 and I still felt completely lost. I moved back to Ohio with my family, and I started praying like my parents always told me I should. I thought I might go into law enforcement like many veterans do, so I moved to Southern California to scope out a potential career.

After a few months of praying and cleaning up my act, I started finding answers. I was living in San Diego, where I was going to school at the time, and I wanted to work in the security industry for some extra cash. I was speaking to a Vietnam veteran who was giving a class for those who wish to get into the security industry, and he completely opened my eyes to a fact that had not been brought to my attention in the Marines. He said to all of us, “The reason the U.S. has so many enemies is because we create them by not minding our own business.” Right then and there it was like the veil of deceit had been ripped from my eyes. I went home and started searching for all things related to foreign policy, which is how I found Ron Paul on YouTube. I watched Dr. Paul’s famous “What If?” speech, and I could not help but become furious. It was not because the Congressman offended me, but because he had enlightened me about just how wrong I was. I knew, as soon as I was done watching his speech, it was not a “What If” speech but a “What Is!” speech. After watching the “What Is!” speech, I was led to Web sites like campaignforliberty.com, antiwar.com, and lewrockwell.com. I started to become even more outraged after realizing that I had been lied to my entire life by my government, the media, and my history teachers. I really took a hit in the face while watching our former fearless leader President Bush jokingly say in front of the elite media “Those weapons of mass destruction gotta be somewhere.” I wonder if the thought of my fellow veterans blood-curdling screams or the children of the Middle East getting blown to smithereens in the name of protecting us from those non-existent weapons ever crossed his mind. Probably not, just like the real sounds of war haven’t entered the mind of our current chicken-hawk-in-chief, Barack Obama.

Veterans Day is no longer a holiday I will celebrate, unlike most Americans who thank our service members for “defending our freedom.” I can only hope that someday all of the flag-wavers and veterans marching in the parades realize that the people of the United States have been manipulated into every war of the past hundred years, and are continuously being bombarded with propaganda to continue the wars today. Will my fellow Marines ever come to know that Major General Smedley Butler is not just the name of a war hero whose words we had to memorize by heart? Will they ever come to realize, as General Butler realized, that we are and were nothing but “musclemen” for the criminal corporate and banking cartels, and servants for the Corporatists who are perpetuating the destruction of the very idea they claim to be fighting for. I have come to this realization.

I wrote this article to give some truth to the concluding statement in Mark Crovelli’s article “Kiss Honor and Morality Goodbye in the U.S. Armed Forces.” In his concluding statement, Mr. Crovelli said, “May God protect us all from this group of people whose allegiance is to secrecy, immoral war, and lying politicians, instead of to defending the people of the United States.” I believe that some sort of divine intervention, in combination with a good conscience, has indeed shown me the light towards real morality and real patriotism through articles like the ones found at this Web site and other liberty-loving websites. Furthermore, I see that many more veterans have and will come to see the light of truth. My goal is to help highlight the fact that they, like myself, have sworn to “uphold and defend the Constitution from enemies both foreign and domestic,” and that our greatest threat comes from the state itself; not the Middle East. As long we continue to educate all of those who are and were serving in the military about the constant stream of lies our government spews, they will join the true patriots and the actual fight for the restoration of liberty.

WikiLeaks’ release of classified information has generated a lot of attention world-wide in the past few weeks.

The hysterical reaction makes one wonder if this is not an example of killing the messenger for the bad news.

Despite what is claimed, information so far released, though classified, has caused no known harm to any individual, but it has caused plenty of embarrassment to our government. Losing a grip on our empire is not welcomed by the neo-conservatives in charge.

There is now more information confirming that Saudi Arabia is a principle supporter and financier of Al Qaeda and this should set off alarm bells since we guarantee its Sharia-run government.

This emphasizes even more the fact that no Al Qaeda existed in Iraq before 9/11, and yet we went to war against Iraq based on the lie that it did.

It has been charged, by self-proclaimed experts, that Julian Assange, the internet publisher of this information, has committed a heinous crime deserving prosecution for treason and execution or even assassination.

But should we not at least ask how the U.S. government can charge an Australian citizen with treason for publishing U.S. secret information, that he did not steal?

And if WikiLeaks is to be prosecuted for publishing classified documents, why shouldn’t the Washington Post, New York Times, and others that have also published these documents be prosecuted? Actually, some in Congress are threatening this as well.

The New York Times, as a result of a Supreme Court ruling, was not found guilty in 1971 for the publication of the Pentagon Papers. Daniel Ellsberg never served a day in prison for his role in obtaining these secret documents.

The Pentagon Papers were also inserted into the Congressional Record by Senator Mike Gravel with no charges being made of breaking any National Security laws.

Yet the release of this classified information was considered illegal by many, and those who lied us into the Vietnam War and argued for its prolongation were outraged. But the truth gained from the Pentagon Papers revealed that lies were told about the Gulf of Tonkin attack which perpetuated a sad and tragic episode in our history.

Just as with the Vietnam War, the Iraq War was based on lies. We were never threatened by Weapons of Mass Destruction or Al Qaeda in Iraq, though the attack on Iraq was based on this false information.

Any information that challenges the official propaganda for the war in the Middle East is unwelcome by the administration and supporters of these unnecessary wars. Few are interested in understanding the relationship of our foreign policy and our presence in the Middle East to the threat of terrorism. Revealing the real nature and goal for our presence in so many Muslim countries is a threat to our empire and any revelation of this truth is highly resented by those in charge.

Questions to consider:

1. Do the American people deserve to know the truth regarding the ongoing war in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Yemen?

2. Could a larger question be: how can an Army Private gain access to so much secret material?

3. Why is the hostility mostly directed at Assange, the publisher, and not our government’s failure to protect classified information?

4. Are we getting our money’s worth from the $80 billion per year we spend on our intelligence agencies?

5. Which has resulted in the greatest number of deaths; lying us into war, or WikiLeaks’ revelations or the release of the Pentagon Papers?

6. If Assange can be convicted of a crime for publishing information, that he did not steal, what does this say about the future of the First Amendment and the independence of the internet?

7. Could it be that the real reason for the near universal attacks on WikiLeaks is more about secretly maintaining a seriously flawed foreign policy of empire than it is about national security?

8. Is there not a huge difference between releasing secret information to help the enemy in the time of a declared war – which is treason – and the releasing of information to expose our government lies that promote secret wars, death, and corruption?

9. Was it not once considered patriotic to stand up to our government when it’s wrong?

Thomas Jefferson had it right when he advised: “Let the eyes of vigilance never be closed.”

Congress was recently notified by the US administration that it would be selling weapons to Saudi Arabia in one of the largest arms sales in history. The $60 billion deal includes advanced military aircraft, new helicopters, and other weapons such as missiles and bombs.

Aside from the fact that the costs of US weapons development are socialized while the profits are privatized, this seems like we’re just selling weapons to another country. It doesn’t really seem like a big deal, considering how much foreign aid we usually provide to everyone so they can fight against each other; but this arms deal has much more to do with foreign policy than meets the eye.

You see, the connections between Saudi Arabia, Iran, and the United States make up the Bermuda Triangle of foreign policy. This twisted three way is deeply confusing for most, and truly disturbing to think about for many others.

We have to look a bit back in history in order to understand the complexity of this relationship.

The Iran-Iraq War is a good place to start. When Iraq invaded Iran in 1980, the United States remained officially neutral while covertly assisting the Iraqi Army. As Iran started to succeed against the Iraqi invaders, the United States increased its support for Iraq, most likely because the United States was still a bit touchy about the events one year earlier, when Iran overthrew the dictator that the CIA had placed in power.

Iraq realized in 1988 that it couldn’t pay back its heavy debts to Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. Saddam Hussein didn’t believe Iraq had to pay back its debts to Saudi Arabia because the Saudis had only supported Iraq in the war due to fear that the new Iran would influence the Saudis’ Shi’a minority, who controlled the majority of oil fields. No agreement could be found, and Iraq proceeded to invade Kuwait two years later. This marks the beginning the Gulf War and the US government’s close relationship with Saudi Arabia.

Once the Iraqi Army was in Kuwait, its proximity was close enough to strike the Saudi oil fields, the fact of which was worsened by Hussein’s verbal — and extremely hypocritical — attacks on the US-supported Saudi state. Eventually the US military sent 543,000 troops into Saudi Arabia in order to protect it.

That is how much we have supported Saudi Arabia; and, due to that support, they’ve allowed us to keep around 5,000 troops in their country since 1992, a number that rose to nearly 10,000 during the recent conflict with Iraq. Saudi Arabia has become our puppet, and this leads directly to our relationship with Iran.

Iran has already experienced what it’s like to deal with a puppet. The Shah brutalized that country to an extent beyond imagination. It’s no wonder why Iranians just want to be left the hell alone.

I’ll be the first to admit that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says some crazy things from time to time, but, if the Iranian citizens don’t like him, it’s their own problem to deal with, not ours, and they surely are capable of dealing with it. They toppled a previous oppressive regime backed up by an even bigger foreign military. If you don’t see the reflection of our own country’s founders in that mix, you’re not paying attention.

Now, whether or not Iran’s nuclear program poses a threat to the United States doesn’t really matter, because, as we’ve seen throughout the past decade, preemptive wars do not end well; and the only reason Iran would ever attack us is if we were to intervene even further in its affairs.

I mean, the United States continually enforces sanctions against the country, installs military bases surrounding its borders, and supports much more oppressive regimes; and we continue to ask why the Iranians are scared? They have as much right to defend themselves from us as we do from them. Of course, when the US government doesn’t get its way, it has to call in the United Nations.

The most recent of the sanctions against Iran, passed earlier this year, have crippled Iran’s economy in the name of hurting Iran’s government. The United Nations is arrogant for thinking that sanctions hurt governments and not citizens. It is incredibly easier to be poor in the United States, where the economy is at least semifree, as opposed to in a country where imports are impeded by illegal blockades, and thus costs are raised.

So, in essence, the US government likes the Saudis because they allow us to be in their country, and it doesn’t like the Iranians because they don’t want us to be in their country.

But we have to make sure to understand the importance of the depths of these relationships, or else the debate ends up focusing on some kind of nonexistent difference in mentality between Saudis, Iranians, and Americans that we can somehow fix overnight.

We always need to see things from various perspectives. How would we feel if Iran were to set up multiple military bases in Mexico, Canada, and Cuba? The answer is that we’d feel threatened.

A big factor in the equation is that Mecca and Medina, the two holiest Islamic cities, are in Saudi Arabia, where our troops were stationed, which is one of the main reasons for the attacks on September 11th.

It is true that we took out most of our troops from the area in 2003 in order to ease tensions caused by our foreign interferences; but for the United States to supply Saudi Arabia with a massive arsenal near the holy Islamic cities is a disastrous idea. With Iran’s recent insistences on being a sovereign nation, our sale to Saudi Arabia is our government’s way of telling Iran, “We’re not there, but we are.”

This arms deal is aggressive and demeaning; and it in no way protects the interests of the United States. Until our military is completely out of the Arabian Peninsula, we cannot expect to make any peace with foreign nations.

Brian Anderson is a student at Arizona State University, studying genetics and entrepreneurship. Send him mail. See Brian Anderson’s article archives.This article originally published in Arizona State University’s State Press.Comment on the blog.You can subscribe to future articles by Brian Anderson via this RSS feed.

Why are young Americans being maimed and killed every single day in Afghanistan and Iraq? Why is it that tens of thousands (or more) of innocents in the Middle East have been maimed and murdered, and millions have been displaced from their homes and country? Why is it that their infrastructure has been completely destroyed? Is it because both these countries have nuclear and chemical weapons and the capability to use them against us, and have threatened to do so? Is it because the federal government is protecting us from an eminent air or naval attack by these countries? Is it simply due to the false notion that these countries were responsible for the 9/11 attacks? Of course none of these reasons exist, nor are they valid at any level. Neither of these countries, nor for that matter any other Middle Eastern country, has ever attacked, threatened to attack, or even had the capability to attack the United States. The U.S after all, is the most powerful nation on planet earth with the most powerful military force.

These wars then are being waged for other reasons; reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with national security. So why then are U.S. forces there? In my opinion, there are many reasons, but not a single one is moral, constitutional or right. The general reasons are always the same it seems, those reasons being money and power. War of course is all about both money and power, and war is big business exemplified. Just consider a few of the major recipients of military contracts; contracts that result in hundreds of billions of dollars in additional revenue every year for those businesses who are dependent on death for their survival. Some of those include companies like Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Boeing, Raytheon, United Technologies, and of course the infamous Halliburton and XE Services, formerly Blackwater, and yes, even General Motors. Of course, many oil companies are also on this list. There are of course, hundreds of thousands of U.S. defense contracts awarded or “won” each year. According to this site, over 530,000 defense contracts worth over $362,000,000,000.00 were issued (“won”) in 2009 alone. This list of companies receiving tax money for military contracts is staggering to say the very least. You see, when I said war is big business, I wasn’t kidding. When considering that these current wars have been going on for over ten years, it is obvious that these wars alone create a multi-trillion dollar business!

Now consider all the politicians who represent all the towns, cities, and states across this nation, and one can begin to understand the relationship between war, money, and political power. Then consider all those political contributions made by all the contract companies scattered across America to these same politicians. Are you beginning to get the picture? If you think you are, then think some more. Who finances all these transactions and controls all the money during this process? The big banks do of course, and because of this they are able to expand by leverage these huge sums of money into very questionable investments; investments that garner them billions in profits. These massive profits are obtained at the expense of us all. What about all the foreign companies getting defense contracts? What about all the foreign governments gaining money and protection to participate in these wars of aggression? What about all the oil and oil pipelines, and other natural resources being stolen and controlled by the U.S. due to these unholy wars? Who will reap the monetary benefits of this piracy in the future? Believe me when I tell you: It won’t be you or me!

In addition to the monstrous monetary benefit to government and its agents in business during a time of war, the increase of power over the individual and the destruction of civil liberty expand at an alarming speed. The aggression and occupation against Afghanistan began in 2001, and the additional war of pure aggression and occupation against Iraq began in 2003. Given that most across this country are now celebrating Veteran’s Day because they have been brainwashed into believing that war protects freedom, let’s look at just a few of the things that have not saved, but destroyed our freedom just since these wars began.

In September of 2001, the Office (later Department) of Homeland Security was established. With that came the passage of the most evil USA PATRIOT Act, this atrocity passed even before either of these immoral wars began. This legislation was the beginning of the end of freedom and liberty as we know it. In 2002 the Homeland Security Act was passed. To follow was the Aviation and Transportation Security Act, which created the rights destroying and depraved TSA. Also to come of course was sanctioned torture, NSA warrantless spying, wiretapping, and surveillance of American citizens, the heinous Military Commissions Act of 2006, extraordinary rendition, virtual elimination of habeas corpus, CIA secret prisons, and “enhanced” interrogation. Along with this came draconian financial regulation and data basing of all financial transactions. Please keep in mind that these are but a few of the destructive events against freedom that have taken place just since 2001. There have been literally thousands of new laws and regulations passed over the past ten years that have done nothing but harm liberty. Does anyone in this country really believe that these wars of aggression protect or enhance freedom and liberty? Is anyone that gullible and blind? Is there one shred of truth in the notion that the troops warring overseas are fighting for our freedoms? Not only no but hell no!

The ugly truth of the matter is that those troops, whether they realize it or not, are doing nothing but helping to abolish freedom by doing the bidding of the State, and advancing the real goal of government, which is to enhance its power over the citizenry. In the process, the politicians and their partners in crime become rich, while the rest of us become poor. They become more powerful while we become more enslaved. They act like wolves while the dumbed-down citizenry become sheep awaiting the slaughter. What has happened to the once sovereign and free individual?

There is a way to alter this march toward serfdom and the murderous behavior of the state apparatus. I suggest a reversal of roles where the beneficiaries of this aggression and murder are forced to fend for themselves, while the citizen victims of this immoral imperialism refuse to be used as cannon fodder any longer. How would this work?

First, since all modern wars are started by the executive branch of government, the president should be the very first to go to the front line of battle. All in the executive branch of government, including all cabinet members, should accompany him. All members of Congress, those who acquiesced their duty to control and declare constitutional war, should then go marching off behind them. Those in the judiciary should quickly join in since they sanction these atrocities in their corrupt courts. We cannot of course, leave out all the CEOs of those corporations who benefit monetarily from defense contracts, and all the Federal Reserve and major investment bank presidents across the country. From a military standpoint, all who go to actual battle should go in order of rank, officers only, from the top down. This means the first to be in harm’s way should be the generals. This progression should be a good start to end all aggressive and occupational wars.

Why is this so? This is so because these are the cowards among us. They only want to start and benefit from wars; they are not willing to prosecute them. And why should they when they can send the children of others to die for their gain? Why should they put themselves at risk when the parents of the young are willing to sacrifice their own flesh and blood for the gain of their elected “leaders?” These are “leaders” I might add, in name only, because they will always refuse to lead into battle. True cowards you see will never risk their own lives when they can use the lives of others as their cannon fodder. This is the hard truth, and all should be willing to accept it.

Many of these political trimmers will scream at the top of their lungs that they already did their part in the past, but this argument should fall on deaf ears. Only politicians start wars, so politicians should be fully responsible for leading the way into this hell that only they create. Sending others who were never responsible for sanctioning murder abroad into the trenches of death should never be an option. Let’s get back to the personal responsibility that evil and corrupt politician’s talk about from their podium on high. They should lead by example, and if they refuse, they should be forced to do so. This would be the only conscription I would ever agree to enforce. The result of this posture will be an end to all wars, because these cowards will never voluntarily put themselves into harms way. They will simply slink away into the background, hoping to escape all danger.

This is my recipe for peace. It is not complicated nor is it difficult to accomplish. It simply requires those who want to war to be the first in line to do so. If the war is justified, others will voluntarily join with them in order to protect their families and their country, but if it is not, the warmongers will be on their own.

If nothing else, look on the bright side. If the lowest among us, who are those we call politicians, were actually willing to do their own bidding by prosecuting their own wars, then we would no longer have to worry about career politicians, and incumbents would not continue to be parasites feeding off the citizen host. In reality, this would never happen, but what would happen is that war would become a thing of the past, and peace would finally be achievable! What a wonderful world that would be!

November 13, 2010

Gary D. Barnett [send him mail] is president of Barnett Financial Services, Inc., in Lewistown, Montana.

Liberty Stickers

Disclaimer

https://ephraiyim.wordpress.com contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit whose expres use is for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.